Compulsory mediation is a form of alternative dispute resolution that can be required by contract or court order. It can reduce the burden of court cases and provide privacy, but may not always be effective if parties are not willing. Mediation is generally less expensive than court and can be required in contracts such as prenuptial agreements. Courts may also order mediation in certain cases. Mediation is guided by a neutral third party and can help parties work towards a fair settlement. Settlement agreements made in mediation may be enforceable in future lawsuits.
Compulsory mediation is a form of alternative dispute resolution that requires participants to go through a mediation process before or in lieu of legal proceedings. Unlike voluntary mediation, compulsory mediation can sometimes be required by an existing contract or ordered by a judge. Proponents believe that mandatory mediation can help reduce the burden of the court case, allowing parties in good standing to resolve their issues with assistance instead of relying on a judge to resolve the matter. In cases where the parties are genuinely against it, however, compulsory mediation can turn into nothing more than a blind game.
Because mediation is generally much less expensive than court, some contracts have a clause that requires mediation or another form of alternative dispute resolution, such as arbitration, for all disputes. Since mediation does not result in a legally binding decision, contracts that mandate the process usually make it a precursor to a traditional judicial process. Mandatory arbitration, on the other hand, is usually included in a contract as an alternative to court, as it results in a binding decision. Contracts that may require mediation include prenuptial agreements, service agreements, and landlord-tenant agreements.
In some regions, the court may reserve the right to order mediation in certain cases. Family law cases, such as divorce and custody issues, as well as debt issues and simple civil cases, are sometimes subject to court-ordered mediation. The trial may be ordered if a judge decides it will be more efficient and less costly for the participants to attempt to reach a joint decision. For this type of mediation to work, the judge generally has to assess whether the parties are able to act in good faith to reach a solution.
There are some advantages to mediation, whether it is compulsory or self-chosen. First, the process is guided by an educated and neutral third party who can help both parties work towards a fair settlement. The mediator can help keep discussions on target, which can be very helpful in contentious cases or situations where there are strong emotions. Additionally, mandatory mediation provides greater privacy than a public trial, as mediation sessions are usually conducted in the strictest confidence. This can prevent the public dissemination of dirty laundry in court, which can be very important in cases where personal or professional reputation is at stake.
With some courts turning to compulsory mediation as a means of streamlining the legal process, one of the main questions raised is whether decisions made in mediation are enforceable. If the parties work out a solution in mediation, the judge may rely on them to enforce deadlines, rather than issuing a final court ruling. Some jurists suggest that the settlement agreement, while not legally binding, should be made admissible as evidence in a future lawsuit in the event that one party refuses to abide by the terms of the settlement.
Protect your devices with Threat Protection by NordVPN
